Finance AI Index

Index › Vendors › AccountsReceivable.ai · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

AccountsReceivable.ai

6Judge labels

1First choices

3Negative labels

5 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

1 label, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. AccountsReceivable.ai was named 1 time in Cash application, where HighRadius led with 16%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business26 of 82

under the label threshold

Mid-market17 of 83

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In cash application · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named AccountsReceivable.ai for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Cash application	Receivables and billing	2%	17 of 83	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by HighRadius at 16%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for AccountsReceivable.ai yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated AccountsReceivable.ai across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained4 labels1

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative6 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Specifically designed to be an "enterprise-style" cash application tool but built for mid-market and small businesses using QuickBooks or Xero.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Cash application · budget prompt · first choice

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as AccountsReceivable.ai, over the 6 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AccountsReceivable.ai was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Billtrust5 of 60Not in the top three

HighRadius4 of 62Not in the top three

Esker4 of 60Not in the top three

BILL3 of 60Not in the top three

Chaser2 of 60Not in the top three

Versapay2 of 60Not in the top three

HighRadius Credit Cloud1 of 61Not in the top three

Lunos1 of 61Not in the top three

Lunos AI1 of 61Not in the top three

BlackLine Cash Application1 of 60Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named AccountsReceivable.ai. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 5 of the 6 answers that named AccountsReceivable.ai and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

accountsreceivable.aiYour site5

highradius.com4

lunos.ai4

stuut.ai4

debtagent.ai3

billtrust.com2

chaserhq.com2

eco.com2

f6s.com2

learn.g2.com2

Twenty-five of the thirty domain citations in answers naming AccountsReceivable.ai came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

accountsreceivable.ai/accounts-receivable-automation-pricing2

accountsreceivable.ai/blog/accounts-receivable-automation-cost2

eco.com/support/en/articles/16402406-best-accounts-receivable-software-20262

learn.g2.com/best-accounts-receivable-software2

resources.rework.com/tools/billing-revenue/best-accounts-receivable-software-20262

stuut.ai/blog/highradius-pricing-breakdown-cost-comparison-with-alternatives2

stuut.ai/blog/o2c-software-pricing-mid-market2

toolmasta.com/blog/accounts-receivable-automation-pricing2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as AccountsReceivable.ai

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as AccountsReceivable.ai; a claim can dispute any of them.

AccountsReceivable.ai / RemitClear 1

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when AccountsReceivable.ai's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as AccountsReceivable.ai, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at accountsreceivable.ai is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.